Income Tax

Addition confirmed for non filing of affidavit stating that assessee had not agreed for addition during assessment proceedings

Addition confirmed for non filing of affidavit stating that the assessee had not agreed for the addition during the assessment proceedings as stated in assessment order

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2452 (2018) 08 ITAT

The instant appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by CIT(A) in confirming disallowance of interest and PPF interest expenses.

The assessee had filed return of income electronically. Being a survey case, the case of assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) was issued. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the assessee had claimed interest and PPF expenses against the disclosure of income during the survey.

The AO was of the view that since the disclosure was over and above regular income earned by the assessee, no expenses could be claimed out of the said undisclosed income. It was recorded by the AO in the assessment order that the issue about disclosure and admissibility of the expenditure had been discussed with the AR of the assessee, and the AR agreed for the addition.

The AO accordingly made an addition.

The CIT(A) observed that as per the assessment order, the AR of the appellant had agreed for the proposed addition during the assessment proceedings. However, the appellant had not made any submission on this account during the appellate proceedings. In absence of any evidences filed, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO in making the disallowance and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

On consideration of the above facts and circumstances, the Tribunal observed that authorised representative of the assessee has admitted the proposed adition before the AO. However, no affidavit had been filed before the CIT(A) deposing therein that the AR of the assessee had not admitted the addition before the AO without his permission nor affidavit of the authorized representative had been filed stating therein that he had not agreed to before the AO about the above addition.

Therefore, in view of the concurrent finding of the both the authorities below indicating that this addition was admitted by the assessee, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • ICAI

CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.

CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…

1 day ago
  • Insurance

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act – SC

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act. Courts to award a composite…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

CIT notice u/s 263 quashed as AO rightly took DVO value of property as actual sale price

CIT Revision notice u/s 263 quashed as the Assessing Officer rightly taken DVO value of property sold as actual sale…

3 days ago
  • GST

Extension of timeline for implementation of Ship To GSTIN & Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities

Extension of timeline for implementation of mandatory "Ship To GSTIN" and Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities GSTN Advisory dated…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

No protective addition required when additions is confirmed in hands of searched person – ITAT

No protective addition required in the hand of a third party when additions have been confirmed in the hands of…

4 days ago
  • arbitration

Limitation u/s 34 of Arbitration Act commences on disposal of application u/s 33 by Arbitral Tribunal – SC

Limitation for filing application u/s 34 of Arbitration Act commence from date on which application u/s 33 is disposed of…

1 week ago